07 Jan 13, 05:48 pm
thoughts I had to be incorporated into the formal AO response:
1. support the move (since the actual RS2477 route is NOT known), and the move would not block access.
2. support protection of a trailhead parking lot to allow continued access with legal, safe parking
3. stress year round access by all users since this is called a 'winter-connector' trail...we need access to the river and right now the State has taken the block across the pipeline from the FNSB.
4. stress motorized use, especially by vehicles and ATVs.
5. suggest parallel non-motorized (ski, hiking, bike) trail since the corridor is 100 feet...this would allow rutting and summer OHV use.
6. suggest development of a more broad trail system especially on the East of the Trans Alaska Pipeline.
1. support the move (since the actual RS2477 route is NOT known), and the move would not block access.
2. support protection of a trailhead parking lot to allow continued access with legal, safe parking
3. stress year round access by all users since this is called a 'winter-connector' trail...we need access to the river and right now the State has taken the block across the pipeline from the FNSB.
4. stress motorized use, especially by vehicles and ATVs.
5. suggest parallel non-motorized (ski, hiking, bike) trail since the corridor is 100 feet...this would allow rutting and summer OHV use.
6. suggest development of a more broad trail system especially on the East of the Trans Alaska Pipeline.
![[-]](http://www.arcticoffroad.com/images/collapse.png)